Trade Now

Capital at risk Advertisement
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Nanoco Group Plc LSE:NANO London Ordinary Share GB00B01JLR99 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  1.40 3.69% 39.30 96,557 16:35:07
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
37.10 39.20 38.10 37.90 37.90
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Technology Hardware & Equipment 2.09 -5.08 -1.44 126
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
16:35:07 UT 181 39.30 GBX

Nanoco (NANO) Latest News

More Nanoco News
Nanoco Investors    Nanoco Takeover Rumours

Nanoco (NANO) Discussions and Chat

Nanoco Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
08/8/202215:38Nanoco/Dow - 2016 a transformational year for CFQD25,612
13/5/202215:35NANO Rocketing18
08/11/201916:59value of Nanoco5
05/11/201909:20sp will rise3
30/10/201907:53Apple won patents covering quantum dots display-

Add a New Thread

Nanoco (NANO) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Nanoco trades in real-time

Nanoco (NANO) Top Chat Posts

Nanoco Daily Update: Nanoco Group Plc is listed in the Technology Hardware & Equipment sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker NANO. The last closing price for Nanoco was 37.90p.
Nanoco Group Plc has a 4 week average price of 33.60p and a 12 week average price of 26.65p.
The 1 year high share price is 47.90p while the 1 year low share price is currently 16.05p.
There are currently 321,433,522 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 797,425 shares. The market capitalisation of Nanoco Group Plc is £126,323,374.15.
paul planet_earth: htTps:// "The Quantum Dot Market Growth Sees Rate of 25% With The Rising Demand For Smart TVs And Mobile Phones As Per The Business Research Company's Quantum Dot Global Market Report 2022" "The global quantum dot market size is expected to grow from $4.70 billion in 2021 to $6.03 billion in 2022 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 26.35%. The change in the quantum dot market growth trend is mainly due to the companies stabilizing their output after catering to the demand that grew exponentially during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The market is expected to reach $14.68 billion in 2026 at a CAGR of 25.02%." "Increasing R & D investments is a key trend gaining popularity in the quantum dot market. Many companies are nowadays exploring new technologies and undertaking research in the quantum dot display market. For instance, in October 2020, Samsung Electronics, a South Korea-based producer of electronic devices, through their R & D hub, Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology (SAIT), developed blue Quantum Dot light-emitting diodes (QLEDs). These quantum dots deliver improved luminous efficiency by 20.2%, having a maximum luminance of 88,900 nits and a 16,000-hour QLED lifetime. "Major players in the quantum dot sensor market are Crystalplex Corporation, InVisage Technologies, LG Display Co. Ltd., Nanoco Group plc, NanoPhotonica, Nanosys Inc., Navillum Nanotechnologies, Nexxus Lighting, NN-Labs LLC, Ocean NanoTech, Osram Licht AG, QD Laser, Quantum Materials Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Sony Corporation, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., DuPont, 3M Company, Apple Inc., Life Technologies, Merck Group, Nano Elements Source, LLC, Pacific Light Technologies, Sigma-Aldrich Co., Techinstro and Intelligent Materials Private Limited, and Ultra Nano Tec." BUT ONLY ONE HAS A SEEDED ORGANIC CADMIUM FREE QUANTUM DOT MANUFACTURING PROCESS!..ALL THE OTHERS USE HEAVY METALS WHICH ARE CANCEROGENIC, DANGEROUS TO THE EVIRONMENT, SOURCED FROM POLITICALLY UNSTABLE COUNTRIES, AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT AND VERY COSTLY TO RECYCLE..GROWING CONSUMER DEMAND WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO A DEMAND FOR SAFER ORGANIC QD SOURCES.
wandsworth1: @BigE and to: Whilst I broadly agree with BigE I think he is a bit too harsh on Nanoco as it stands as a company now. BT, the CEO strikes me as a common sense, no hyping up person who is working hard on cost efficiencies. Furthermore I think that the chances of Nanoco winning the upcoming trial are good. Similarly I don’t think that BT’s optimism on impending commercialisation was hype or deceit. The current share price reflects the uncertainties surrounding the trial and commercialisation but given the potential I in my humble personal opinion (please do your own research) think it is not a bad entry point - if either commercialisation or win at the trial is pulled off we will look back at the current share price and wonder why we didn’t put more money in.
wandsworth1: @barkboo: As a Nanoco investor and that with a decent amount invested I believe that Nanoco will win the court case and that the monetary award will definitely be bigger than the current market capitalisation of Nanoco. So I will not enter a net with you. However, I still don’t believe Samsung is manipulating the Nanoco share price. Samsung is posting massive profits so they will pay any award to Nanoco with money/small change from their drawer. They don’t need to manipulate the share price cause quite frankly they don’t need to care financially. Samsung by all we can see didn’t behave properly and thought they would be able to get away. They clearly underestimated the tenacity of the Nanoco management and are now stomped by Mintz’s legal team. Still we need to be realistic about the share price - there are unknowns here and I personally think that post trial the share price might be in the region of 70 - 100p but not more… so not the many multiples you think. Everyone please do your own research.
givmesunshine: Barkboo Agree =best way to look @ Nano is on a worst case senario. A) PTAC has been won 5-0 on a straight sets of 47-0 - but Samsung are appealing.. We are going to trial or settling as the court will be looking at the willful part and asessing damages .. Samsung are trying to go for a summary judgement on the willful part.. filed before the lifting of the Stay.. can only assume this all hinged around thier "speculative claims" (Gilstrap) that PTAC would be overturned.. So worst case.. Wilfull infingemnt didnt happen (yeah right) but maybe possible in the eye of the law. OK then its straight on to damages, they still have used the IP for years. then in 12 months time we lose the appeal ... Thats the very worst case - Probability 5 percent ? Even then in 12-18 months time.. so whats the downside risk Short Term ? I may be naive but as you said - the difference between the two payouts is, “wilful” So as a bookie would look at it short Term A ) Worst case outcome - no willful victory at the trial and lowest damages (that could still be massive) that are then later lost 100% at ptac appeal say odds 20/1 chance - share price ST should still be alot higher as we may well have samsung apealing a $400million award B) Next worse case outcome - A willful victory at the trial and high damages (that are massive) that are then later lost on ptac appeal odds say 6/1 chance - share price should still be alot higher as we may well have samsung apealing a $1 billion award. or settling early C) Next best case - win the case and the appeal 1/3 on - but will have to wait a year - but same Short Term share price impact as outcome B A) Best case - settle out of court Odds - evens - unless we settle for less than £50 million and no royalties - share price will be much higher - low 2x high 6-8X.. Long way of saying it - but there isn't a lose on wilfill infringment only a margin of victory over the use of our IP which is already proven and only given about a £20-£30 million value in the current share price . Downside very limited updside both ST and LT 2-10 times current SP
barkbooo: The settle was odds on in my book - however, the price today looks manufactured and suggests Samsung are looking to buy ramp intended, but i have no answers to the reasoning of todays price. We will win the Court Case - and a 30p something share price today is almost a laughable and unbelievable reflection of that victory. Perhaps Samsung want to offer ten times todays value - and off todays worked price, that would probably look generous?? Ten times off a £1 share price - would be another story!
mapocho: Nothing in life is a dead cert. Everything has some element of risk. Samsung are in a difficult place imo because they ripped off Nanoco. It's as simple as that. To start with Pickett, O'brien et al are all university scientists with a degree of honesty and integrity. Samsung management are all from cut throat business backgrounds. Then you have the 5 years of collaboration and the building of a multimillion factory to produce Qdots for Samsung before the plug was pulled. But crucial of all is the evidence in the science. There are only 2 ways to produce Qdots: dual injection using cadmium as a stabliser or molecular seeding, in other words growing the dots in clusters. This doesn't need cadmium because it's not an explosive method. Anyway, Nanoco have found seeding clusters in Samsung's TVs so Samsung are going to have to explain that for a start. And they won't be able to do so imo. Also, Nanoco have 5 claims over the 5 days in court. So it's a trial on 5 issues. They only need to win one of them for damages to be awarded. Perhaps they'll get off with one but not all 5. I don't think some people on this board understand how important Qdots are to Samsung. It forms the basis of their future tragetory for display. They gave up on oled years ago, mainly due to the organic instability/degradation. To be fair to Samsung they are the only company to produce Qdot TV's cadmium free with a high degree of quality. But that was due to their early focus on idium phosphide which has higher levels of optical qualities than the composition of Nanoco's dots. Nanosys are also now focussing on IP. The problem Nanosys have though comes back to the manufacturing process. They claim to be using hot injection, but I very much doubt this. I think they will be next in line for Nano's legal team, along with Hansol and quite a few Chinese producers imo. The biggest villian though is SAIT, Samsung's technical hub, which is why they are named on the Docket as prime defendents. The only hope Samsung have is a freak Jury selection. Or a corrupt one. I doubt that very much indeed. So Samsung have to settle soon imo or face damages plus a multiple for wilful infringement. Once the jury find in favour of Nanoco it's pretty useless in the US system to appeal on the merits. More success appealing the level of damages. And we've already seen what the US legal system things of the matter. Winning all 47 claims at PTAB is almost unheard of. I read it as a statement of principle as those who decided could see what was happening. Plus you have, finally, Nanoco coming up with a self sustaining product for ST Micro. They have already started promoting their Qdot sensors in the market. Anyway, I see Samsung settling. If Nano can get damages plus a royalty agreement it should set the share price alight. Their seeding patents expire in 2025-2028, but they have other core shell stuff going to 2035. Could be worth a billion or more for a company valued at 100 million. Map
paul planet earth: Clarea.. "I'm hoping for the same result as you Millwall but the questions to ask is if its a total slam dunk why isn't the price £2 already" Further to my earlier reply...the stock market is not perfect, perfect information is not fully and widely available and no one likes uncertainty however small the probability, and people drive markets and some use algorithms to help them..But the point is how often in history you could have said "if only"..Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Ebay, Tesla share prices..and say looking back it seemed so obvious where the share price was "hindsight"....I would say those invested in Nanoco are using their "foresight" and tremendous patience as to where the quantum dot revolution with Nanoco a key player is heading. Look at the quantum dot industry interms of a technology curve...The industry was slow to start for many years as it took time for the technology to develop given the complexities and challenges and for QD products to come to market...Roll fwd twenty years and the industry is now entering a steep incline, the growth face, with Samsung alone selling 9.5m QDTV's a year and seeking to switch all its LCD lines to QDTV...Look at their competitors...Sony, LG all following the same path with QD's.... We are now seeing QD's beginning to surface in multiple markets and products e.g. car sensors, AR/VR Apple headgear, lap tops, smart ultra thin QD film for many new and exciting products, markets, and applications beyond just consumer electronic products...e.g. medical, horticultural, military applications.... Nanoco in my view was always a commercial success its just that is was never "paid" by Samsung for using its technology and subsequently hamstrung by them as a result of their unethical and underhanded behaviour.. Add to that the very likely outright cadmium and heavy metal ban as OEM products grow globally in sales volumes with organic dots the obvious alternative...and..come back in a few years time with "hindsight" on what the share price turned into assuming Samsung don't make a bid to buy Nanoco outright in the coming weeks.
millwallfan: Clarea. PPE makes valid points (as usual) as to why the share price is where it is. I managed to access a docketbird document which detailed various specific dates for new court deadlines on a range of issues which have since 2021 due to the Samsung driven PTAB which is now resolved (100%in Nanoco favour). As I and several others have suggested, given recent developments of PTAB and Orulings from Judge Gilstrap surely Samsungs legal and financial advisors will be working tirelessly on ‘damage limitation’ options (re reputational, financial and further worldwide legal challenges) assessing the risks for both pre court settlement and letting the court case run its course. From major court cases I have been involved with (insurance claims based) it is not unusual for the out of court settlement to literally be agreed at the eleventh hour, so if that holds true for IP theft litigation we may not see a Samsung offer until early October. HOWEVER, I’m sure Nanoco and their own advisers and litigation funders will have already calculated the minimum acceptable settlement which ,if not offered, would result in a swift and bold ‘ no dice pal, see you in court’. I believe Samsung know how bullish Nanoco can afford to be so perhaps if they do intend to make a pre trial settlement they would be silly not to leave enough time to negotiate. As such September might prove to be an interesting month unless this does go all the way. What I am not totally sure of (comments please) is IF Samsung make a substantial offer would that require a RNS as it would clearly impact on share price OR would it be treated as ‘sub judice’ with no notification until a deal had been reached ?
aberloon2: RNS just out...Tue, 7th Jun 2022 16:55 RNS Number : 0515O Nanoco Group PLC 07 June 2022 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 7 June 2022 Nanoco Group PLC ("Nanoco, the "Group", or the "Company") Litigation Update Texas Trial Stay Lifted - Trial to follow shortly thereafter Nanoco Group plc (LSE: NANO), a world leader in the development and manufacture of cadmium-free quantum dots and other specific nanomaterials emanating from its technology platform, announces an update to its litigation against Samsung for the willful infringement of the Group's IP. His Honour, Judge Gilstrap, has lifted the stay on the trial to be held in Texas. The pre-trial conference date has been set for 16 August 2022 and jury selection has been set for 12 September 2022. The trial is expected to follow shortly thereafter. Brian Tenner, Chief Executive Officer of Nanoco Group plc, said: "We were ready and confident to go to trial in September 2021. We won all 47 of our claims examined by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in May 2022. This effectively settled the issue of validity emphatically in Nanoco's favour. So we are still ready and even more confident to go to trial in September 2022. "The trial can now focus on the issue of Samsung's alleged wilful infringement and the appropriate level of damages. We remain convinced of the strength of our case and that a favourable trial outcome will deliver a substantial inflection point for Nanoco's prospects and shareholder value." - Ends - For further information, please contact: Nanoco Group PLC: Brian Tenner, CEO +44 (0) 161 603 7900 Liam Gray, CFO & Company Secretary +44 (0) 161 603 7900 Peel Hunt: Edward Knight +44 (0) 20 7418 8900 James Smith Turner Pope Investments (Joint Corporate Broker): Andrew Thacker +44 (0) 20 3657 0050
paul planet earth: I'm now thinking that Samsung won't buy out Nanoco but will reach a global settlement before the case goes to court in October above $500m but below the $750m figure I suggested..Meaning circa 80p per share as a special dividend after tax, legal funders share, share holder loan repayment and some cash held back as working capital funding. The annual licence agreement with Samsung will mean the share price will rise to 150p even if the IP has only 5 years to run the annual post tax licence income would be minimum £80m per year.. All in 230p a substantial return on the 37p current share price .And this would also secure Nanoco's future allowing it to grow and expand with share price more than doubling within the next year or so on the back of the ST Micro contract..This time next year the share price may hit 250p valuing Nanoco at £767m.
Nanoco share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

Log in to ADVFN
Register Now

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20220808 16:50:16